Looks like Gov. Snyder is now saying NO to Syrian refugees coming to Michigan....
http://www.freep.com/story/news/loca...gees/75825736/
Looks like Gov. Snyder is now saying NO to Syrian refugees coming to Michigan....
http://www.freep.com/story/news/loca...gees/75825736/
It doesn't matter what he wants to happen. The governors have no say in the matter.Looks like Gov. Snyder is now saying NO to Syrian refugees coming to Michigan....
http://www.freep.com/story/news/loca...gees/75825736/
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/ar...g-power-to-act
I support the Chaldeans 100%.
Some Republican presidential candidates want a religious test before admitting Syrian refugees? These clowns are here strictly for our entertainment I guess. Who won the World Series last year and who are your 3 favorite apostles?It doesn't matter what he wants to happen. The governors have no say in the matter.
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/ar...g-power-to-act
Snyder has a very large indirect say.It doesn't matter what he wants to happen. The governors have no say in the matter.
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/ar...g-power-to-act
Detroit might want to welcome refugees, but has no cash to help them.
Michigan [[Snyder) may not want to help, but he's got access to cash which makes it much easier.
I don't know how the GOP has gotten immigration oh so wrong. In my book, you can be against specific immigration programs, but to be against immigration in concept -- is really un-American to me.
Europe hasn't done it right -- but at least they are trying.
It doesn't matter what he wants to happen. The governors have no say in the matter.
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/ar...g-power-to-act
It says that they MAY have no say in the matter,it does not say they have no say in the matter point blank,does the federal government have the power to force individual states into compliance?
How does the state or governor stop them from coming into the state?
The feds give the refugees visas. The feds give the refugees Money. Once the refugee has a valid visa they can move anywhere they please. This country doesn't have border stations between states.
Good question. The only thing the newspaper tells us is that the feds reimburse the states for the expenditures.
Which would mean that the feds are acting in the disbursement of the refugees and the states are the go between.
So unless the feds follow through from start to finish 100% and every refugee is under federal control,which could not happen because local LEO could not even issue or enforce a speeding ticket without bringing it to federal court.
I would say if that is the case then yes the states do have a say and a pretty big one.
Then you get into the game of the feds saying if you do not do this we are going to this,its goes back to the federal government having to much control over each individual state and dictating their course of actions.
Last edited by Richard; November-16-15 at 03:29 PM.
I guess you didn't read the article.
[quote]The governors are making essentially symbolic statements because it’s the federal government and the nine resettlement agencies it contracts with that determine whether refugees enter the U.S. and where they settle, said Melanie Nezer of HIAS, a Jewish nonprofit group that works with refugees who also is chairwoman of Refugee Council USA in Washington.
“It’s really hard to see exactly what this is other than political,” Nezer said of the governors’ statements.
[\quote]
I don't see any state involvement here.
[QUOTE=ndavies;493321]I guess you didn't read the article.
The governors are making essentially symbolic statements because it’s the federal government and the nine resettlement agencies it contracts with that determine whether refugees enter the U.S. and where they settle, said Melanie Nezer of HIAS, a Jewish nonprofit group that works with refugees who also is chairwoman of Refugee Council USA in Washington.
“It’s really hard to see exactly what this is other than political,” Nezer said of the governors’ statements.
[\quote]
I don't see any state involvement here.
Scott says several organizations have been in touch with the state’s Department of Children and Families about them relocating more than 400 possible Syrian refugees since they receive federal funding to do so.
our state agency will not support the requests we have received,” wrote Scott.
In the letter, the governor admits that the state can stop the federal government from relocating the Syrian refugees to Florida. So he’s ordered state agencies to reject any calls requests to help the refugees and called on Congress cut off funds for relocation.
http://miami.cbslocal.com/2015/11/16...ated-to-state/
"Effective today, I am directing the Texas Health & Human Services Commission's Refugee Resettlement Program to not participate in the resettlement of any Syrian refugees in the State of Texas. And I urge you, as President, to halt your plans to allow Syrians to be resettled anywhere in the United States," Abbott wrote in the letter.
http://www.newschannel9.com/news/top...ld-22173.shtml
That should help out a little more or make it clearer.
So the Federal government vetts the refugees.
They then allocate X amount to each state.
The receiving state enrolls each refugee in the state run benefits programs.
The Federal government reimburses the state for monies spent from their program.
Providing they have the funds.
So it is clear that the federal governments only role is the vetting and allocation of the actual refugees,they are not set up with a support system other then that aspect.
Yay! Let's feed into want ISIS wants!!
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...ees/?tid=sm_fb
This crisis will likely become part of Bill Schuette's campaign platform.
lol,if you were backed into a corner holding your child would you lay down and die or would you fight?
I would think that IS figures that the more that leave the less they have to fight to obtain their county that they can call their own.
Maybe,we can find them some island somewhere and let them have that.
That's one dumb nerd.
In all seriousness, I thought he was above these disingenuous political ploys. The Syrian passport is suspected to be fake, and if that's true then it was most likely used by someone who was already an EU citizen. If that is true then it's also likely that exactly zero actual migrants were responsible for the attack.
It's also much harder to use a fake passport to board a plane, which any refugee would need to do in order to get here from Syria.
Millions of pounds of drugs are smuggled into this country every year,this whole perceived veil of security has only made some very rich and the ones that would never even think of committing a crime let alone a terrorist act very inconvenienced.
I does seem like everything is pretty much about politics anymore though,it is all about jumping on bandwagons.
No not really.
Daesh only cares about the caliphate, and not much else. They are up for some infidels that want to fight them with rifles or machine guns in pickup trucks or a whole town full of women and young girls they can enslave but they really could care less about anyone that flees the caliphate. They are only are interested in refugees for propaganda or recruitment proposes but the reality is after that their position is 'good riddance'.
Looks like Gov. Snyder is now saying NO to Syrian refugees coming to Michigan....
http://www.freep.com/story/news/loca...gees/75825736/
He's right. Some Syrian Refugees could ISIS defectors. Just need to play it safe.
They can start by accepting vulnerable groups and minorities such as Christians and Yezidis for the time being.
There is truth to this, but its also true that we've descended into camps with rigid orthodoxy. The environmental left has decided to fight any fossil fuel project regardless of its merits, and the tea party has decided to fight all immigration reform, regardless of its merits. But they both have principles they are following. Its not just bandwagons.
From the WP:That's the core of the article. And they're right. Being open to Syrian refugees might be the best solution to the crisis -- but its not the orthodoxy of the right -- so its out-of-bounds. The right really is missing the boat on this one. They should be fighting for reasonable rules and procedures to manage the crisis -- not fighting the individuals.If Muslim refugees come to Europe and are welcomed, it deeply undercuts the Islamic State's legitimacy.
So your solution to fighting ISIS is basically to allow Syrian "refuges" to dispossess Europeans in their own lands?That's the core of the article. And they're right. Being open to Syrian refugees might be the best solution to the crisis -- but its not the orthodoxy of the right -- so its out-of-bounds. The right really is missing the boat on this one. They should be fighting for reasonable rules and procedures to manage the crisis -- not fighting the individuals.
Experts: Michigan lacks authority to refuse refugees
http://www.detroitnews.com/story/new...gees/75941414/
Last edited by ndavies; November-17-15 at 03:25 PM.
there's likely to be more open bashing of refugees in the months to come. It will likely become a prime topic in the Presidential race.
I believe on can fight ISIS -- including troops on the ground -- and still accept refugees from Syria. While related issues, they aren't mutually exclusive. The world, and Europe in particular, need to recognize that the states that they've created require a common believe in secular states. You have the right to free speech while you're in the west, but if as a refugee you preach against the secular state, you can and should be deported back to Syria. Free speech is absolute. And so is not committing treason.
You didn't answer my question. I see you are a believer in the "magical soil" theory. We'll bomb the Syrians in their own country, and then when they come to the West and step on some of our magical soil they will suddenly transform into us. By the way, will you be signing up to join the war efforts? Or will you just be cheer leading on the internet about troops on the ground?I believe on can fight ISIS -- including troops on the ground -- and still accept refugees from Syria. While related issues, they aren't mutually exclusive. The world, and Europe in particular, need to recognize that the states that they've created require a common believe in secular states. You have the right to free speech while you're in the west, but if as a refugee you preach against the secular state, you can and should be deported back to Syria. Free speech is absolute. And so is not committing treason.
I don't get what you're saying at all. I don't think that they transform when they arrive. And I don't think we are currently 'bombing Syrians' -- not that we don't kill some here and there -- but we're a long way behind Assad at an estimated 300,000 dead to date. That's not collateral deaths, that's intentional, pre-meditated, intentional deaths. Sure, we bomb Syria. But we are not trying to kill Syrians. In fact, we're trying to protect them.You didn't answer my question. I see you are a believer in the "magical soil" theory. We'll bomb the Syrians in their own country, and then when they come to the West and step on some of our magical soil they will suddenly transform into us. By the way, will you be signing up to join the war efforts? Or will you just be cheer leading on the internet about troops on the ground?
Now what on earth were you trying to say?
|
Bookmarks